(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Annual Evaluation Report Fiscal Year 1984"

101-6

C. Costs, Benefits, and Effectiveness; (continued)

Students Served: The States reported that Chapter 1 students had the
foil owing achievement characteristics:

o In elementary school reading projects, the "average" entering Chap-
ter 1 student scored at the 24th percentile.

o In elementary school mathematics projects, the "average" entering
Chapter 1 student scored at the 29th percentile.

o Thus, the "average11 Chapter 1 reading student appeared to be more
educationally disadvantaged than the "average" Chapter 1 mathematics
student.

o In high school reading projects, the "average" entering student
scored at approximately the 19th percentile.

o In high school mathematics projects, the "average" entering student
scored at approximately the 26th percentile.

o Thus, the "average" high school student who received Chapter 1 math-
ematics instruction appeared to be less educationally disadvantaged
than the "average" high school student who received reading instruc-
tion.

o High school Chapter 1 students are further behind their peers than
are elementary school Chapter 1 students.

In general, these findings are very similar to those reported for the pre-
vious three years of Title I/Chapter 1.

Program Effectiveness: The reading and mathematics achievement results of
Chapter 1 students In grades two through twelve are presented in Table 4.
These results are from school districts that used an annual (I.e. spring-
to-spring or fall-to-fall) test cycle for students who participated 1n
Chapter 1 programs.

In all but two cases, States reported gains in the percentile standings of
participants between the pretest and the posttest. However, these results
should be interpreted with caution, since the evaluations may contain small
biases of from one to two Normal Curve Equivalent units (NCEs), particularly
in the lower grades 2J.

Overall, achievement results for school year 1982-83 were about the same as
those found in school years 1979-80 through 1981-82. They are consistent
with earlier studies and reports on the effectiveness of compensatory
education, which generally assert that:

o Achievement gains are made in most (but not all) grades, but they
are modest, with greater gains made in the earlier grades.

o Gains are not usually sustained after program services are discon-
tinued, particularly in mathematics. (State-reported achievement
data are collected for one school year at a time, and do not gener-
ally address the "sustained effects" issue. See Section III below.)tion, see